linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 04/11] rcupdate: remove dead code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 23 Feb 2011 09:36:49 -0500
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
	Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 04/11] rcupdate: remove dead code

* Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
> 
> DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD depends on PREEMPT, so #ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT
> is totally useless in kernel/rcupdate.c.

Why does it depend on PREEMPT exactly ? Only for the fixup ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <amwang@...hat.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/rcupdate.c |    5 -----
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcupdate.c b/kernel/rcupdate.c
> index a23a57a..afd21d1 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcupdate.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcupdate.c
> @@ -215,10 +215,6 @@ static int rcuhead_fixup_free(void *addr, enum debug_obj_state state)
>  		 * If we detect that we are nested in a RCU read-side critical
>  		 * section, we should simply fail, otherwise we would deadlock.
>  		 */
> -#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT
> -		WARN_ON(1);
> -		return 0;
> -#else
>  		if (rcu_preempt_depth() != 0 || preempt_count() != 0 ||
>  		    irqs_disabled()) {
>  			WARN_ON(1);
> @@ -229,7 +225,6 @@ static int rcuhead_fixup_free(void *addr, enum debug_obj_state state)
>  		rcu_barrier_bh();
>  		debug_object_free(head, &rcuhead_debug_descr);
>  		return 1;
> -#endif
>  	default:
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> -- 
> 1.7.3.2
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/